07 May Public Interest Fellowships for Deferred Law Firm Associates
I continue to read stories of law firms who are encouraging their associates to take a paid leave-of-absence next year. As reported here, Skadden is offering associates $80,000 to take a year off. Morrison & Foerster reportedly will pay incoming associates approximately $85,000 if they will defer their start date until January 2011. Many other firms, including Latham & Watkins, Dechert, Alston & Bird, Morgan Lewis, and Weil Gotshal, reportedly (see here, here, here, here, and here) will pay in excess of $75,000 if incoming associates will simply defer their start dates.
The catch is that these associates must work for a public interest organization in the meantime. Let me repeat, the catch is that these brilliant, talented, young eager associates must work for a public interest organization for little or no pay if they wish to receive over $75,000 in salary from their current or future law firm.
If you are a public interest organization, this is like manna from heaven. Human rights NGOs, law school clinics, public interest law firms, all potentially are unintended third party beneficiaries of these remarkable deferred start-date packages. The question is how to link up these wonderful associates with public interest organizations. If you are either an incoming associate who has been offered one of these deferred state-date packages, or if you work for a public interest organization that could benefit from outstanding free labor, I would encourage you to notify me or post a comment expressing interest in this match made in heaven.
I have little doubt that my school, for one, could find some wonderful pro bono international public interest or human rights clinical work for you to do in Malibu, California for an academic year. Seriously.
Of course, the depressing part is that those of us who are interested in public interest work as a career have to compete against “manna from heaven.” (Yes, I recognize the sarcasm of your post. Point remains, nonetheless.)
I am a lawyer at a major non-profit with offices nationwide. I think the deferral idea is terrible for exactly the reason DMFV says. A whole class of non-profit lawyers will be supplanted by folks with no demonstrated interest in a long term non-profit career. Worse, having overpaid junior associates (who may make as much as their senior managers) thinking they are a “gift” will be harmful and morale-damaging.
I agree! I actually LEFT the law firm fast track a few years ago to pursue my interest in IHR (with only moderate success so far) . Now I feel like a schmuck!
I disagree with the premise that young associates at major law firms are not public-spirited. Many are/will be very active doing pro bono work at their firms (I certainly was when I was in private practice). Many have financial commitments, such as student loans, that preclude an immediate public interest career.
Moreover, many public interest organizations simply do not have the money to pay a young lawyer $40,000 or more, but they have more than enough on their plate if someone is willing to work for free (or be paid by a third party).
Rather than focus on the harm this causes to aspiring public interest lawyers, let’s focus on the benefit this confers on public interest organizations and their clients. I’m already receiving expressions of interest in finding a match.
Roger Alford
Why can’t we focus on both? IHR/Public interest law is extremely difficult to break into and many of use have sacrificed quite a bit to pursue what we love – thinking that doing so was the only way in. And now associates are given easy entry!? It’s very frustrating personally. Moreover, these associates are not getting these positions based on merit, but rather based on financial considerations. The fact that associates may be public-spirited does not mean they have the relevant background and experience for these jobs- or AS relevant a background as others.
I do a lot of work for a non-profit and have already hooked them up with the Morgan Lewis program. I know it’s easy to dump on BigLaw young associates, but in my view they rose to the top at law school for a reason — they are smart, quick learners, and overachievers. There’s no reason they can’t do a great job at a non-profit.
I am not dumping on big law associates – I used to be one and I like to think I rose to the top for those same reasons! But then I quit to pursue IHR and it is just plain unfair that I am edged out of jobs by firm associates with the same smarts, but less interest and less relevant backgrounds (but more financial backing).
Oh, how nice. BigLaw associates do pro bono work. Maybe even up to 100 hours! In a year! Such public-minded, public-spirited, wonderful gifts to the law, they are. And firms don’t reward them for it, by say reducing the amount of billable hours necessary to get a bonus depending on how many pro bono hours you work. God Bless Them.
(Yes, I get tired, very quickly, of hearing about BigLaw, because the people in my class who are going into BigLaw only talk about, and seem to care about, $. And that, to me, is sad. So perhaps you’ll forgive me if I feel frustrated that BigLaw associates are going ghetto for a year (while being paid a substantial amount of money) and doing something for which I feel deeply committed and by doing so are going to make my life that much more difficult. And yes, even thinking that causes a conflict for me, because I recognize that public interest needs all the help it can get. So I also feel selfish for even thinking this way. Which is frustrating, too.)